Monday, July 25, 2011

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

I've been thinking recently about God and whatnot, and I've come to an ultimate conclusion, at least about something that should be changed within the entire Christian rulebook -- and trust me, this is a big one.
God should not be addressed as He.

Now, I feel like I have rather simple reasoning for this; if there is this omnipotent, omnipresent being occupying this world, isn't addressing it a 'He' suggesting limitation to an all-powerful being? Like, that since God is a He, then it certainly can't be a She, which means that God isn't this being that can do whatever, whenever, however.
So yes, whenever I refer to God.. I generally use the word it (trust me, gets really hard to do sometimes).

Obviously, the use of He stems from back when the bible was being written; where it was male dominated -- and since men were the rulers, God HAD to be a He. Men were regarded as 'more human' than women; entitled to a greater ability to live than their Y chromosome-less counterparts. So even the thought of regarding God as a She, or perhaps even an It would be heresy and pure insanity, mainly because the men were on such a high horse that any reference to God not being the same gender as them would severely emasculate the men. So perhaps there was a somewhat plausible reason to such a term being used back then, but now when we live in a society where women can vote, and are regarded as equals to men (unfortunately, not in every single way possible.. but we're getting there); there shouldn't be any excuse that God still needs to be given an actual gender, and I also assume that some extreme Christian sexists will use God's apparent gender to bring women down a peg in their eyes.

So really, is it not logical that we throw away giving God a gender, and instead give another term? God is not the father of all, it is also the mother of all as well. Referring to God in some gender-neutral term (please, figure something better than it..) allows God to remain all-powerful and without any sort of limitation..

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

I feel as though I should create a separate statement for the other section of my beliefs regarding children; exactly how I might raise one. Over the past six months or so; I've felt rather scared or hesitant of that hopefully eventual moment and opportunity, when I can one day help create life. Though the main source of my fear is exactly how to raise a child right. It seems so high stake to me, that if I even did one thing wrong, it could change things for the worse in a big way. But as I think back to my childhood, as to what actually defined me; I become almost belittled. I can't quite figure that main reason I turned out to be the way I am. Not to say that the way I am is the right way, although I am certainly happy with the way I am. It's that I can't pinpoint things that I could take personally to use with my future offspring. Sure, my mum is incredibly loving, but I also have two father figures that I don't really like or respect, and it concerns me most that I have no template to base legitimate fatherly love on, the kind that I wish I received. I'm also rather puzzled as to how to pass on my beliefs to children, like, I can't quite figure if I would want my children to become vegetarian, I mean, I guess it's their choice, but perhaps their mother would be vegetarian and it would just be a culture of sorts to not eat meat, and I would do my best to educate the child/ren on the moral reasons as to why I don't eat meat, among other ethical and moral points in general. That's also where I find an issue, I can't see teaching morality to work like "sit around Johnny, I'm going to tell you what I believe in.. and you better agree with me or you're grounded!" because I again, would want the child to develop their own moral compass, in the same way I formed mine. I learned an extremely good analogy today regarding a different issue, but it applies to what I am saying: "you can't steer the wheel when someone else is driving, you can only put up signs to suggest changes to their path or hazards along the way". I guess I would need to learn to be more subtle as opposed to being so opinionated.
So really, I hope that when it comes; fatherhood will be an opportunity to learn and grow, because obviously it's such a sharp difference from life beforehand. That I hopefully would be a good enough person to pass on that to a person whom I have helped create.

Alright, just to get this out of the way. I do not really like children.

As much as I kind of should; as I'm supposed to love everyone, a lot of children annoy me. My nephew, Oliver, is the one exception to the rule, and he proves that not every single toddler needs to be a little shit, who cries for everything. I'm stubborn in regards to walking around the shopping centre; if I hear a child crying, I always find endless joy in seeing the child's parent ignoring him/her, nothing else makes me happier. I guess it stems down to my easily agitated nature. I'm not that person who is going to give someone what they want if they go about it the wrong way. If someone asks me for help without at least doing so politely, I would like to think that I would ignore them. Sure, some children wouldn't understand the convention of etiquette, so I fully realize that I should excuse them, but I don't. I also realize that I am extremely contradictory to my previous entry, but that's just the way I am. I have good days and bad days. But in the end, when I hopefully eventually have a child, I'm not going to be that parent who lets the child do whatever. It's not too hard to teach a child manners. Little bastard toddlers turn into bastard teenagers and they turn into bastard adults. It's all about being a good parent, people. So people, when your kid wants a lollipop and you refuse initially, don't give into mindless tantrums in order to get piece and quiet. Because guess what? You're going to be suffering them a lot more in the future if you unconsciously teach that child that tantrums are the correct way to obtain items they want.

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Today has been a rather thought-inspiring day, after listening to a worship album that I downloaded -- more for the positive words I had heard beforehand on its superb atmosphere, than any interest in actually hearing a praise album. You see, I have a love/hate relationship with Christianity, and I'm always trying to figure my particular stance with God and with other Christians. You see, I grew up in a Christian family and attended church most Sundays (or Saturdays, the early years were Seventh Day Adventist) and over time, I've kind of distanced myself away from the whole of organized religion. But what exactly is it that makes religion so distasteful to me? Insincerity is my major point. Ask a Christian what they would do if there was no God, and I think they wouldn't even allow themselves to think of such a thing. They act as though it's a sin in itself to let the thought of a world created by other means. But really, I can't help but believe that if it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that God was indeed not real, that Christians would not continue to live in the manner which they preached. In my opinion, a lot of Christianity is based around a two-way relationship: "you help me; I praise you for helping me, and I live my life in a particular way" but if such a person doesn't receive help, as I've heard time and time again; they turn their back on the religion, simply because they believe that this higher being should be the guiding hand for everything wrong. That Christians like to think that God is some sort of crutch, without whom they could not live. But they key to happiness, I believe, is relying on nobody but yourself, because we are ultimately the only truly reliable one. I don't trust that something is done 100% the way I want it unless it's done myself, and in the same manner, Christians expect it to be done, not by themselves, but by something else. Also, the main desire of a Christian is to obtain entrance into Heaven, but really, ultimately being a good person doesn't need a reward. All of their good deeds could be classified as false, because they are doing to for a reward down the tracks, that they aren't doing particular things because it's what's right. Same with bad deeds, these people are afraid to sin because they are scared of the concept of Hell, and being sent there. not because it's simply a bad thing to do. It all seems to me that people are acting in ways for the wrong reasons.So essentially, I have tried to live in an opposite manner, yet still retaining the values of love and friendship which I feel lie at the core of Christianity itself, that over the years, the original ideals of religion as a whole have been tarnished. That we shouldn't feel a need to believe the same as every body else because we all go through a different journey of life, and to believe the duplicate of millions of other people is also not sincere. Don't treat faith as a blind object, criticize God because then any sort of relationship can indeed grow stronger. In the same manner that fighting with a friend, a lover, or a family member can make things better, because we shouldn't hold critique inside, because then nothing can progress the way it was made to.

I guess it all stems down to my belief that people shouldn't really be praised unless they've done something right, because that's simply how we learn. That if I do something wrong, I'd prefer to be told so, than believing that I'm doing a wrong thing right. Ultimately, I'd like to see a person who's had an absolute crap life, yet still believed despite nothing going right. I would respect that person, if they didn't expect to be taken out of what troubles they already had.

I may sound unfocused in what I say, but that's only because I am unfocused in what I actually believe. My ethical system is a constantly changing cloud that constantly floats around my head, somewhat to my misfortune. But really, just even questioning our own sense of morality is what allows us to become greater and better people.